Their company isn’t even a year old, but the couple have managed to carve a unique niche in the video-production market. They produce high-definition Internet films showcasing luxury homes. Beneze shoots and edits video. His wife, Maureen, writes scripts and produces the videos.”

Is it possible to do both real estate video and still photography? Right now many photographers want to specialize in one or the other. But I believe cameras like the D90 and 5D Mk II are the first step towards convergence. If you can shoot still and video with the same equipment, why not do both?

JoshL, you clearly have not seen some of the sample videos made by the new Canon 5D MkII…. Some professionals are claiming that the quality is better than some HD $100K video equipment. I have seen a video that was made by this camera and the quality is exquisite!

Don’t have an issue with quality, I have every confidence that it surpasses HD video equipment in most picture quality aspects.

But, it is clearly IMPRACTICAL to shoot a video production with an SLR body. Sure, there are some incredible examples of what is possible, however these examples are generally static shots, most of which are painfully lit and requires a lot of production.

You cannot simply go from SLR to video and achieve the dynamic qualities that is required from Real Estate Videography. ( Image stabilisation, Steady Cam Walk Through, Panning, Dynamic adjustment of exposure from one angle to the next….. the list goes on )

If all you’re doing is shooting real estate video from one angle, and not moving the camera, you’ve got photography with some waving trees dancing in the background – what’s the point? Start moving the camera, welcome to ammeture world.

It’s hard enough shooting video on a tiny camcorder, let alone an SLR camera body not much bigger. The issue I have is the impractical nature of shooting with something like the 5D mk II, not the quality.

Totally agree with Josh in every respect. I think this camera will be PERFECT for newspaper reporters who are now incorporating video into their news stories. It’s convenient, it mounts on a tripod and takes a 2-3 minute clip of a talking head or whatever…

But for making much more than that, it seems impractical, not to mention the 12 minute limitation.

I’m not 100% sure about the need for high definition on the web. By the time it’s been compressed down I don’t think you notice a difference from standard def. The SD pro cameras with wide angle lens option like the Canon XL1/2s are much cheaper

I agree with Josh….. while video will play a part in the future, I find that most home shoppers only want to see the vid once they have looked at the stills. It is second on the list of have to see items and if the stills don’t grab them then they just move on to the next listing. Vid still has some hurdles to get over but I am watching it carefully.

I agree with Peter..Amazing.
Well done Canon.
The video grabs for print were always way short of the mark.Some video guys were trying to sell them, but it didnt work.
Now Canon have seen that, they have gone the other way you will see a combination of two skills from both ways.cant be bad.
the stills from video were rubbish, it will be interesting to see the videos from still shooters.Just another skill.
I think I will start my Final cut pro courses pretty soon.